The South Carolina Supreme Court on Wednesday reversed Alex Murdaugh’s double-murder convictions and ordered a new trial, ruling that the Colleton County clerk of court improperly influenced jurors and “placed her fingers on the scales of justice.”
In a unanimous per curiam opinion, the court adopted the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ three-step framework for evaluating third-party contact with jurors, clarified the scope of the Remmer presumption in South Carolina and overruled precedent allowing juror testimony about deliberative mental processes.
“Both the state and Murdaugh’s defense skillfully presented their cases to the jury as the trial court deftly presided over this complicated and high-profile matter,” the court wrote. “However, their efforts were in vain because Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill placed her fingers on the scales of justice, thereby denying Murdaugh his right to a fair trial by an impartial jury.”
Murdaugh, the disbarred lawyer convicted in March 2023 of killing his wife, Maggie, and son, Paul, at the family’s Colleton County estate, will be retried. Attorney General Alan Wilson said prosecutors would pursue the case again.
The court found Hill repeatedly warned jurors not to be “fooled” or “convinced” by Murdaugh’s defense and urged them to scrutinize his body language while he testified. An alternate juror testified Hill stood at the jury room doorway and said: “They’re going to say things that will try to confuse you. Don’t let them confuse you or convince you or throw you off.”
The opinion said Hill made similar comments to court staff and media and told colleagues a guilty verdict would help her sell a book about the trial.
Adopting the test from United States v. Cheek, 94 F.3d 136, the court held a defendant alleging improper third-party contact must first show the communications were “more than innocuous interventions.” Once that threshold is met, the Remmer presumption of prejudice automatically applies, shifting the burden to the state to prove “no reasonable possibility” the verdict was affected.
“We clarify today that when faced with a third party’s improper contact with a juror, our courts should follow the Fourth Circuit’s three-step analysis as set forth in Cheek,” the court wrote.
The court rejected former Chief Justice Jean Toal’s 2024 ruling, which placed the burden on Murdaugh to prove prejudice and characterized Hill’s comments as insufficient to influence jurors. Citing Parker v. Gladden, 385 U.S. 363, the court said Hill’s position as an officer of the court “amplified the impact” of her remarks.
Her statements were “more comparable to those of the bailiff in Parker than those of the bailiff in Green,” the court wrote, distinguishing State v. Green, its 2020 decision holding that a bailiff’s procedural comment about a possible Allen charge did not trigger the presumption of prejudice.
“Hill clearly advised the jurors to find Murdaugh and the evidence he presented not credible and, essentially, urged them to render a guilty verdict,” the court wrote.
The court also held Toal violated Rule 606(b) of the South Carolina Rules of Evidence by questioning jurors about whether Hill’s comments affected their verdicts. To the extent Ethier v. Fairfield Memorial Hospital, 429 S.C. 649, permitted testimony about jurors’ mental processes during deliberations, the court overruled it.
“The state must meet its burden of rebutting the Remmer presumption without exceeding the limits of the Rule,” the court wrote.
Although the ruling made it unnecessary to decide Murdaugh’s evidentiary challenges, the court provided guidance for retrial on Rules 403 and 404(b). Trial Judge Clifton Newman acted within his discretion in admitting some evidence of Murdaugh’s financial crimes to establish motive, the court held, but allowed the prosecution to go “far too long and far too deep” into prejudicial detail.
The opinion noted prosecutors spent 12.5 hours over 10 trial days presenting financial crimes evidence.
The court specifically criticized testimony from Tony Satterfield, son of Murdaugh’s former housekeeper, describing his brother as “a vulnerable adult,” calling it testimony with “zero probative value as to Murdaugh’s motive” and significant prejudicial effect.
Murdaugh admitted at trial to stealing millions from clients and his law firm to support an opioid addiction. He later pleaded guilty in state and federal court to financial crimes and is serving concurrent 27- and 40-year sentences.
Wilson, a Republican gubernatorial candidate, said prosecutors would move forward with a retrial.
“While we respectfully disagree with the court’s decision, my office will aggressively seek to retry Alex Murdaugh for the murders of Maggie and Paul as soon as possible,” Wilson said.
Defense attorney Dick Harpootlian said the retrial “must look very different from the first.”
“Alex has said from day one that he did not kill his wife and son,” Harpootlian said. “We look forward to a new trial conducted consistent with the Constitution and the guidance this court has provided.”
Murdaugh will remain incarcerated on his financial crimes sentences pending retrial.
Hill pleaded guilty in December to obstruction of justice, perjury, and two counts of misconduct in office. She received three years of probation. Prosecutors investigated possible jury-tampering charges but concluded they could not secure a conviction. Her book about the trial was later withdrawn after portions were found to be plagiarized.
